RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Anifrolumab is a type I interferon (IFN) receptor 1 (IFNAR1) blocking antibody approved for treating patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Here, we investigated the immunomodulatory mechanisms of anifrolumab using longitudinal transcriptomic and proteomic analyses of the 52-week, randomised, phase 3 TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 trials. METHODS: Patients with moderate to severe SLE were enrolled in TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 and received intravenous anifrolumab or placebo alongside standard therapy. Whole-blood expression of 18 017 genes using genome-wide RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) (pooled TULIP; anifrolumab, n=244; placebo, n=258) and 184 plasma proteins using Olink and Simoa panels (TULIP-1; anifrolumab, n=124; placebo, n=132) were analysed. We compared treatment groups via gene set enrichment analysis using MetaBase pathway analysis, blood transcriptome modules, in silico deconvolution of RNA-seq and longitudinal linear mixed effect models for gene counts and protein levels. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, anifrolumab modulated >2000 genes by week 24, with overlapping results at week 52, and 41 proteins by week 52. IFNAR1 blockade with anifrolumab downregulated multiple type I and II IFN-induced gene modules/pathways and type III IFN-λ protein levels, and impacted apoptosis-associated and neutrophil extracellular traps-(NET)osis-associated transcriptional pathways, innate cell activating chemokines and receptors, proinflammatory cytokines and B-cell activating cytokines. In silico deconvolution of RNA-seq data indicated an increase from baseline of mucosal-associated invariant and γδT cells and a decrease of monocytes following anifrolumab treatment. DISCUSSION: Type I IFN blockade with anifrolumab modulated multiple inflammatory pathways downstream of type I IFN signalling, including apoptotic, innate and adaptive mechanisms that play key roles in SLE immunopathogenesis.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To correlate the kinetics of B-cell repopulation with relapse after B-cell depletion therapy in SLE patients and address whether variation in relapse rate, B-cell numbers and phenotype are related to anti-dsDNA antibody levels. METHODS: Sixty-one patients with refractory SLE were treated with a standard rituximab regimen. Clinical and serological measures of disease activity and B-cell numbers were assessed. B-cell phenotype was examined in a subgroup of patients by flow cytometry. RESULTS: Disease relapse was substantially delayed beyond B-cell repopulation, and early relapse was associated with a faster rate of repopulation. At relapse, B-cell numbers were significantly lower than at baseline in patients with high anti-dsDNA antibody levels (> 100 IU/ml) but not in patients with low anti-dsDNA antibody levels. Of the patients with high anti-dsDNA antibodies at baseline, levels fell significantly only in those patients who remained in remission after repopulation. Relapse with high anti-dsDNA antibody levels was associated with an increased percentage of IgD(-)CD27(hi) plasmablasts, whereas relapse with low anti-dsDNA antibody levels was accompanied by an increased percentage of IgD(-)CD27(-) B cells. CONCLUSION: Anti-dsDNA antibody levels distinguished two patient groups, which differ in their B-cell number and phenotype at relapse following rituximab, and suggest that different B-cell pathologies exist in SLE. The data imply that B-cell numbers should be kept very low for a sustained period in patients with high dsDNA binding, therefore justifying a more aggressive regimen.